Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Tanzania decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The Court of Appeal dismissed a murder appeal, upholding findings on identification, credibility, alibi, proof beyond reasonable doubt, and juvenile sentencing.
Direct evidence from credible eye witnesses, corroborated by medical and documentary evidence, proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused persons jointly and intentionally killed the deceased with malice aforethought.
Source excerpt
The High Court set aside a rape sentence of 30 years, finding the plea of guilty was not unequivocal and the sentence illegal because the appellant was under 18 at the offence.
The Court of Appeal of Tanzania quashed a rape conviction after holding that the prosecution failed to prove the victim’s age, an essential element of statutory rape.
The notice of appeal was filed within the statutory period by submission to the prison officer; the summary rejection was improper as the judge did not review the record; the appellant, being a juvenile and first offender, should have received corporal punishment only, not imprisonment.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal allowed a rape appeal, finding the charge sheet fatally defective and the prison sentence illegal for an 18-year-old first offender.
Second appeal in a sexual offence case: conviction upheld on circumstantial evidence, but life sentence was set aside because the appellant’s age was doubtful.
The conviction was quashed because the identification evidence was unreliable and the prosecution failed to link the appellant to the crime. The sentence was set aside as it was unlawful to impose imprisonment on a first offender under 18 years old for rape under Section 131(2) of the Penal Code.
Source excerpt
The conviction was unsafe due to unreliable visual identification and lack of proper evidentiary linkage between the appellant and the crime. The sentence was unlawful as the appellant was a child at the time and not a recidivist, contrary to section 131(2) of the Penal Code.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal held that a 14-year-old appellant had been illegally sentenced to imprisonment and that the lower courts failed to follow the procedure for conviction in absentia.
Explore more
